Skip to content

ci: use cargo check for MSRV check#278

Merged
sylvestre merged 1 commit into
uutils:mainfrom
cakebaker:ci_use_check
Apr 1, 2026
Merged

ci: use cargo check for MSRV check#278
sylvestre merged 1 commit into
uutils:mainfrom
cakebaker:ci_use_check

Conversation

@cakebaker

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

This PR uses cargo check instead of cargo test for the MSRV check in the CI.

@cakebaker cakebaker mentioned this pull request Apr 1, 2026
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Apr 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 99.29%. Comparing base (fe0fd40) to head (5de84b9).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #278   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.29%   99.29%           
=======================================
  Files          20       20           
  Lines        3847     3847           
  Branches      121      121           
=======================================
  Hits         3820     3820           
  Misses         26       26           
  Partials        1        1           
Flag Coverage Δ
macos_latest 99.29% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_latest 99.29% <ø> (ø)
windows_latest 14.21% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@cakebaker cakebaker requested a review from sylvestre April 1, 2026 07:44
@sylvestre sylvestre merged commit 108ebcb into uutils:main Apr 1, 2026
21 checks passed
@cakebaker cakebaker deleted the ci_use_check branch April 1, 2026 08:00
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants